Gov. Jerry Brown and both houses of the legislature have agreed to reopen the $96.3 billion state budget process to undo one small provision that sparked outraged editorials in most every newspaper in the state.

The provisions, approved late last week, would have excused local agencies from following certain parts of the open records act, which guarantees the public access to documents of its own government.

“I hope they now realize that the public really does care about the Public Records Act,” said Donna Frye, president of the good-government group CalAware and a former city councilwoman in San Diego. “I also want to believe that our state officials saw the light.”

The proposal from Brown was contained in his budget in January, and was highlighted by U-T Watchdog in February. Other newspapers began writing about it last week, causing a statewide uproar among open-government advocates.

Nevertheless, the provisions were included in a state budget bill that passed on Friday.

Specific provisions that were nullified required agencies to respond to records requests within 10 days, provide electronic copies and help citizens shape their requests. The state was hoping to save money by avoiding reimbursement of local government costs to comply with the law.

The governor on Thursday followed both houses of the legislature in saying the records requirements would be restored.

“We support the legislative leaders’ approach, which will eliminate uncertainty about local compliance with the law and, on a permanent basis, ensure that local government pays for what has long been its explicit responsibility,” Brown spokesman Evan Westrup said Thursday.

The governor’s support for reinstatement of the open-records provisions appears to end an unlikely political chapter that was undermining Sacramento’s sense of accomplishment in passing a budget with good fiscal prospects for the first time in years.

The weeklong saga also forced attention on a sunshine law that many advocates contend needs to be reinforced rather than neutered.

The state Assembly started the backtracking early Thursday, amending the budget bill to restore the California Public Records Act.

Senate President Pro Tempore Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, who on Wednesday said the Senate would not follow suit, reversed course Thursday, saying the Senate would reconsider the measure.

“We agree there needs to be both an immediate fix to ensure local entities comply with the California Public Records Act and a long-term solution so the California Public Records Act is not considered a reimbursable mandate,” Steinberg and Assembly Speaker John Pérez, D-Los Angeles, said in a joint statement to reporters.

Steinberg and Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, also plan to advance a constitutional amendment for the June 2014 ballot that would require local governments to fund all provisions of the records law. The California constitution does not allow the state to impose mandates on local governments without funding them, so a constitutional amendment would be required to make local governments pay the costs.

“As the Senate advances its proposed constitutional amendment, the Assembly will work with them throughout its process to give voters the chance to make clear that good government shouldn’t come with an extra price tag,” Steinberg and Pérez said.

The records costs, estimated at most to be tens of millions of dollars per year, are a tiny amount amid state and local government spending.

Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield, D-Woodland Hills, the budget committee chairman, admitted Thursday that the floor vote last week was not ideal. A compromise plan included in that version of the budget bill suggested that local governments choosing to opt out of the law would have to announce it at a regularly scheduled meeting.

Blumenfield said when it came time to vote last week, he and many of his colleagues had yet to hear much consternation from the public and media groups.

“Cut to today, a lot of folks are waking up on this issue and there is a hue and cry about it, and we want to be responsive to that,” Blumenfield said.

While the action could subject the state to future financial liabilities, “that is a future issue because we don’t actually have a cost estimate on it yet,” he said.

The Assembly vote on a new bill to mandate full compliance was 52-25.

Pérez said it was important to act swiftly to prevent a gap in access to public records.

Republican Assembly leader Connie Conway of Tulare said if parts of the records law were to become optional, corrupt city officials such as those in Bell, Calif., would delight in stonewalling the press and the public.

The Legislature enacted the California Public Records Act in 1968, stating “access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person in this state.” It was signed by then-Gov. Ronald Reagan.